AEA 267 Board of Directors requests new agency name

Citing a need to move from the past to the future, the AEA 267 Board of Directors took steps to begin the process of renaming the agency during a discussion at their meeting held earlier this week.

The issue of renaming is not a new one and has bubbled up many times both internally and with groups the agency serves over the years. Although clearly renaming presents some additional cost and effort, the board believes firmly that doing so is a strategic and important move at this time.

An expedited process will be used in developing a new name. Board members will review a list of the most popular names originally suggested and are expected to make a final selection so that the new name and brand can be in place by July 1, 2012.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to AEA 267 Board of Directors requests new agency name

  1. Douglas Shaffer says:

    Change the name? Think of the expense of email address, web site, letterheads, logos, anything with the AEA267 label. We are still called Area 7 by many people. Money that could be used for more productive items, infrastructure and staff for special need students.

  2. Sara McInernry says:

    Great news! It will be nice to have a real name.

  3. Kevin Scharper says:

    Nothing wrong with a nice name, but……at what price…a person? For what benefit?
    I am reminded of a time I worked for Farm Service in the ’70’s. Farmers had money. I painted barns. We had a waiting list of barns to be painted.
    The farm crisis hits in 1982-85. Farms were sold for pennies on the dollar no matter what name was newly painted on the barn.
    Fast forward to 2010-12 where land prices have soared. Barns are not being painted. The profits are now being invested back into “the ground”, and even “more” ground.
    Maybe, more money for a “new name”, like paint on an old barn, would be better invested back into the ground, namely, our staff and our students.

  4. Theresa Stensland says:

    I tend to agree with the first comment. I would like to know what the additional costs will come to before a decision is made to change the name. With expected layoffs and a budget crisis, it seems like it is a bit trivial and to those folks that will be getting pink slips – maybe not the best move at this time. When can we expect an answer to what the projected costs are of this move?

  5. Patricia Judy says:

    I don’t understand a lot of things, but this one..really? I understood the State was having to ‘cut the budget’ drastically (i.e. laying off people, closing offices, reducing AEA monies). Now our AEA has money to spend on a name change?
    I can only reinterate the dollars involved to redesign logo & website, big outdoor signs, office signs, along with letterheads, envelopes, phone book listing correction, email addresses and then top off with TIME spent on this endeavor.
    As I look at the listing of the 9 AEAs, I notice first we are FIRST and that none of the names emphasize EDUCATION.
    As a employee and taxpayer this just doesn’t seem right nor good public relations.

  6. Jennifer Davis says:

    In talking about the possible name change our satellite office brought up several points that I feel are relevant to this conversation. My hope is that the Board will consider these points before making a final decision.

    Our main question seemed to be why the need for a name change? We could fathom no reason that would rationalize spending money in these lean times.

    How will this impact the agency? The main concern is the cost. People are just a bit stunned to hear that the agency is planning on spending a sum of money on a name change. We are uncertain what the budget will be for next year but the predictions are dire. We have already lost staff and a possible satellite office due to budget cuts. We also have each lost money this year for professional development and materials thus having an effect on our ability to serve children and schools. The fact that any sum of money is being proposed to do a name change is preposterous to many of us.

    Will families and schools better identify with us after a name change? Our families (Birth to 3) and schools know us as AEA267 and to be perfectly honest I do not think they care what our name is, as long as we provide them with the services they need and want.

    How will the name change improve or affect our quality of service? I do not think a name change will affect our services (except maybe negatively because we will never know what that money could have been spent on instead of the name change). However, people may have a harder time finding us after the name change. We can do all the advertising we want to let people know of the name change but the fact remains there will be people who need our services who will not hear of the name change and thus have a more difficult time finding us. We on the front line will also probably be a large part of that advertising I mentioned above. We will have to explain to our LEA staff and families that we have a new name and why it was changed. This may not take up much time but there will be time and effort spent on this.

    Will the name change better identify us? Many of us have lived in Iowa our whole lives and we still have to ask “where is that located” after someone tells us the name of the AEA.

    In closing, I just ask the board to reconsider changing the name. Now is not the time.

  7. Roark Horn says:

    Thanks for the comments so far here on the blog. My guess is that the Board appreciates that folks are sharing their views, both for and against. Those that have commented to this point are citing the cost and the timing, so I would like to provide some clarity. Costs of renaming are estimated to be in the range of $12,000. The timing issue is interesting because many of the higher cost items, such as sign replacement, are necessary in the near future anyway, so those costs will be incurred regardless of whether the name is changed or not. Therefore, if a name change is going to occur, this is actually the best and most efficient time to make that move.

  8. Kathy McCune says:

    I typically don’t respond in this formant but in order to “chime in” have to agree with the already well stated reservations about this. Jennifer Davis has presented it well; cost, confusion, re-networking emails etc across the state/country. Even if it is “only $12,000” I think that is a significant sum that we could put to better use to provide services.
    Keep us 267- it may not be pretty but it works fine and is how people identify us. Time and money would be better spent on other things that will make a difference- a new name won’t.

  9. Barb Oelberg says:

    As you know, every year when they post the wage increases for AEA staff we (AEA 267 and staff) have a hard time justifying to individuals and communities how much money the “State is spending” , so how do you tell our communities that we are spending $12,000 to replace signs, oh and at the same time change our name.
    We know that the AEA funding was cut last year and will have additional funding cuts this year.
    I don’t know where this money is coming from, but how do you explain this to classified staff, who only received a quarter of a percent raise for the 2011-2012 contract year, that this expense is justified.
    I feel that this expense can wait until the AEA is financially stable and not trying to figure where to cut as it is now.
    I don’t think that the AEA 267 signs are going to just crumble to dust if this is put off for a few years and then it still doesn’t justify the cost of changing the name.
    I know we are under new leadership and have several new board members but I am strongly requesting that this project be put on the back burner for a couple of years.

  10. D. Eliasen says:

    Thank you to Douglas, Kevin,Theresa, Patti, Jennifer, Kathy and Barb for saying what I have been thinking all along.

  11. Joe Buck says:

    Respectfully, the timing is really poor. We have a governor and other “certain” legislators who would like nothing more than to see the entire AEA system disappear. This would give them one more excuse to justifiy our non-existence.

  12. Marta Miller says:

    I agree with the comments, thoughts and reasons presented for why changing our name would not be a good idea. I am wondering what data is available to show how a name change will enhance student learning and how will it foster positive relationships with our LEA’s, teachers, parents and the general public. I think that before we spend one dime we should be able to answer these questions.

  13. Kelly Etjen says:

    Hi! I have to say – my 1st impulse on hearing this name change was negative and I am glad to see others who feel the same as I do, I can’t see how this change and cost would be justified at this time.

  14. Shirley Crippen says:

    I agree with the concerns stated above. Please reconsider this recommendation! I can think of MANY different ways to spend $12,000 that will significantly help the children that our agency is serving. Now is certainly not the time to invest that money in a name change. I respect the intent of the board, but completely disagree with the proposal.

  15. Eve Zimmerman says:

    I agree with those concerned about the negative publicity the name change will generate. Also, our constituents finally identify us as AEA 267. How long will it be before the parents, etc, immediately identify us by the new name?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.